leave em alone, the ocean is a dangerous place so is racing and other sports , accept the risk ( as we do in so many other areas where much more people die) or dont go in!!!! And if you put it in perspective its really not that many death ( no disrespect to the victims or there families !!!!!!!!its just about numbers)
I cant see the fuss around it. Ther are too many douchebags around who just yell kill kill kill with now understanding what so ever... and the media isnt helping either
Me too, we've got more acoustic listening devices in the water then tagged sharks. This state has tagged less than about 20 in my opinion. Thats probable close to about half a million per tag so far..Hows that for money well spent.
There are millions of sharks being killed every year as it for there fins etc . And how has that helped the situation - only made matters worse by taking away a food source of the bigger sharks . Big sharks eat smaller sharks .... Keep taking the food source away and there will be more attacks on humans .
This tagging thing is smoke and mirrors they dont want people to know how many of these things are cruising the coast but have probably released this info to the state government hence the cull. If big sharks hang around time to go... Why the debate just another fish people fish and kill a few as bycatch and dont think twice about it but cry about killing these dangerous animals.. And i would start with the one in the sound it has an association with boats and food now so it presents a danger. For public saftey we have to do something.
I'm strongly against it too - they need to implement a good tracking program to try and work out whether it's the same sharks. i.e. rogues.
Funding ? how can they argue against it when they blatantly squander millions on far less worthy causes.
Culling every shark just because it's in a certain area is a joke and could lead to a pile of unnecessary kills.
What about all of the sharks in Cockburn Sound at the moment - are they going to kill all of them ?
Yes, WA has a shark problem.
Yes I have kids who I'd like to be safe in the water.
But this problem was created through human stupidity & mismanagement....... the cull option is just a piss-weak knee-jerk solution, and the sharks deserve far more time and respect.
If they can identify the right shark after a close-to-shore attack, then yes - I'd probably support it. But a cull based on more bad theories & decisions of pig-thick pollies is a joke.
An interesting subject - personally I'm against unless the shark is identified as a definate and immediate threat or is definately one that has recently attacked a person/s. How a body such as fisheries could identify this would not be easy save for cutting the shark open and finding remains. Having someone actually being in a position to kill a shark about to kill someone is unlikely to occur.
Interestingly a majority of families of victims tend to say to leave the shark alone and indicate that's what the victim would have wanted as they were doing what they loved to do and knew the risk...etc
We have a couple of regulars off the adelaide metro coast - some reasonably close to shore and although we have had the odd attack over the years certainly nothing like the frequency around sth wst WA at the moment.
5 attacks in last 10 months - yep seems to be something up over there.
How you'd identify the one (if its one) doing the damage. The only way I can think of this happening is if the right one was tagged and another attack occurred - not ideal but could stop further attacks after that if it could be identified and located/killed.
Need to target the ones coming in close. It won't be many, but if we get them dead then the situation can be looked a twit the view that it can't be the one that was there last year. I feel that the authorities are scared to reveal the true numbers of GW sharks coming in close.
a lot more needs to be know about these creatures before we go out bombing straffing shooting netting and whatever else the human mind can condger up to destroy another animal that shares this planet with us.
the first thing that should be looked at is what has changed in such a short period of time that has seen a dramatic rise in shark sightings and attacks when you know what has changed if in fact it has been a change look at mitigating the change we humans can change our bathing habits and have done so over eions of time to suit the changing enviroment. Mr gw hasn't changed as nature has not forced him to do so so for eions of time all he does is swim foricate and eat.
I don't believe we should bring about a reduction in numbers of gws unless science can quite clearly show that numbers have increased to such a level that there can be a cull without stuffing up the balance of nature.
Look back at the cane toad stuff up someone said if we don't look back at history we are in grave danger of repeating it
Completely agree with that one , shoot the prick and any other sicko that touches children or women for that purpose . Then all the money we save from feeding , housing , etc this scum , can go to a better cause . Leave the sharks be , its a choice we make to enter their world
Unless there is a positive identification of the "killer shark" in question. To some people, a shark is a shark kill em all. Look what almost happened to the Grey Nurse shark on the east coast years ago. I think there is a reason we are getting more big ocean going sharks closer to shore now, perhaps more money should be put to that study & rectifying the problem than paying a bounty on jaws.
I'm all for a cull. I'm sure you would all think differently if it took one of you kids. As for the families of the victims saying that the victim wouldn't want the shark killed I bet while they were being attacked they would be wanting the f#%king thing dead. There are thousands all over the world for them to study killing a few isn't going to put a dent in the population overall.
In a measured manner. And the idea of controlling it (as per other threads) and making money to fund scientific programs and research properly is a win win in my books. There are a lot of them in our waters....thin em out (a bit)
For those people saying that there are plenty of them or there are alot of them, how many do you actually think there are???
And for the people who say there are thousands of them, why do you think there 'are thousands of them all over the world to study'?
Would you really think that "killing a few isn't going to put a dent in the population overall" will actually make a difference to shark fatalities here in WA? I guess it might if it could be proven that the sharks doing the killing are 'local sharks' and not ones that range far across the ocean so hence thinning out the 'local' sharks. Again why there is more research need to determine what sharks are 'locals' and what sharks are transient to our water.
I mean if all the worlds leading shark researchers, scientists, and any other shark experts cant determine the world populations other than rough estimates(which range greatly from numbers as low as 800 right to as 'high' as 5000) how can little old fishing enthusiased here in Perth go, "nah mate plenty of them, kill them, cull them, shoot them etc.
I mean even if they are at the higher end of the estimates being 5000 across the globe, this still puts there numbers scaringly low. Seems one of the widely accepted estimates(amongst Marine boffins) put there numbers around 3500, which would mean they are on par with Tigers in the wild, and even far less than how many Black and or White Rhinos in the wild.
But like i said earlier i personally am not against the destruction of a shark that has been positively identified as a known killer. Its just i can get my head around the people that have the blow them out of the water attitude, or that there are heaps of them and killing a few wont affect the population!
We dont even kill humans that murder, rape and all those other shit things. So why should we kill some animal thats whole job in life is to kill and eat i'm sorry but this whole subject pisses me off greatly. Tag them track them
It's not a human it's a fish there is a big difference. We kill cows,chickens and anythink else that takes our fancy what's the difference. The ocean is 90% unexplored so don't tell me that we will affect the numbers by culling a few.
There has been more and more shark attacks in the last few years so I think that proves that things are changing. So how can you say that a cull won't change anything. My belief is that things will get worse and proof is in the death toll over the last 12 months. There's a fact for you. Maybe these animals were bred for food this is true but the point I was trying make was it is far from being the same as a human. Bad example on my part.
I dive......well I havent much for the last couple of years.... I want to get back into it this summer but to be honest
I'm very concerend about the sharks whereas I never used to give them a second thought, I'm not in favour of a cull
on the other hand I dont want to see anybody else eaten I just know something needs to be done but I dont have the answer, I suppose I'll be staying on the boat until things quieten down and I have a shark shield.... but I still dont have the confidence yet to get in the water
Do the same as what we do to murders put them in a shark jail for 10 years and retrain them as that works really well(for human Rapist and murders so we've seen lately). we dont kill cars, they kill people as does every thing else on the planet a bloke gets killed by a golf ball do we kill the ball or the golfer. or is it just a simple case of more people in the water ? water sports werent as big as they are now surfing, diving as gone nuts in the last ten years
defs against eh. just cause there are whites comin in closer. the sharks have been following the whale migration this year and we "happen to get some whales in close to cott. then a white stated appearing all up and down the coast following and trying to find them. and when that guy got taken at wedge couple of the locals were saying that a whale had just left the wedge a day ago. all these sharks are just trying to follow there food source and then by mistake eat a human because they were in the wronge place at the wrong time
the same thing with the whites at cockburn atm with all the snapper hanging around the whites are cruising round trying to find easy food. this has been happening for the last how many years now.
if a dog/dingo attacks a human...it gets the injection. if a shark attacks a human...its protected. where on a fishing forum..we all take fish out of the ocean. GW in my opinion are no different.
but the carcasses should be used for research! and i only say for because the government wont spend the money to do a proper tagging program! and they wont release accurate data of how many sharks the scientist think are out there
Make them an eligible species again on the GFAA species list, fuck the IGFA as this would take too long, and let members catch them for club/competition points like the old days. If they are so smart, they will soon associate boats with indigestion, pain and accupuncture. If we cull now and close, we will have to cull again and again, probably with a few surfers and divers' deaths in between.
IF my hypothetical situation comes true, and IF you are lucky enough to tag or catch one, just be prepared for the international backlash that you will definately get......should see that banter when one of the boys swings a legal shark and some fin hugging hippy gets a photo of it - less exposure netting dolphins!
scotto
Posts: 2471
Date Joined: 21/04/08
For
No secret around here.
Georgejungle
Posts: 354
Date Joined: 25/03/09
for if its 20 miles out to
for if its 20 miles out to sea leave it alone if its on beachs bullet time
meglodon
Posts: 5981
Date Joined: 17/06/10
shootem i don't think so
i hope i'm not affending you georgejungle but shooting things in water is pretty tricky have a look at this please
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvSTuLIjRm8
aalfred
Posts: 669
Date Joined: 13/06/09
against
leave em alone, the ocean is a dangerous place so is racing and other sports , accept the risk ( as we do in so many other areas where much more people die) or dont go in!!!! And if you put it in perspective its really not that many death ( no disrespect to the victims or there families !!!!!!!!its just about numbers)
I cant see the fuss around it. Ther are too many douchebags around who just yell kill kill kill with now understanding what so ever... and the media isnt helping either
Rick
Posts: 1115
Date Joined: 22/12/06
against
would like to see a lot more tags
PGFC Member
tot
Posts: 1162
Date Joined: 31/01/10
I agree
seems to be an easy option to cull than find out the possible truth of a few big GW's that live around here.
IF that is the case we need to learn to live, in some way with them not eradicate them.
Reverse cycle a/c supply and install - Ducted and wall splits
Rod P
Posts: 725
Date Joined: 20/05/08
Me too, we've got more
Me too, we've got more acoustic listening devices in the water then tagged sharks. This state has tagged less than about 20 in my opinion. Thats probable close to about half a million per tag so far..Hows that for money well spent.
trymyluck
Posts: 908
Date Joined: 06/05/12
FOR ...lighten up the numbers
FOR ...lighten up the numbers and the kids can swim again
championruby
Posts: 459
Date Joined: 20/01/11
Against until proven guilty
Against until proven guilty and even then leave it up to the family to decide.
mitch
Posts: 1285
Date Joined: 14/08/05
FOR
FOR
Buz
Posts: 1555
Date Joined: 28/08/07
Chuck your vote up
Chuck your vote up here
http://www.facebook.com/9NewsPerth
Just1morecast
Posts: 917
Date Joined: 04/12/09
against. But if one attacked
against. But if one attacked a person and somehow could pin point the same shark then i agree.
Forever learning with fishing
tot
Posts: 1162
Date Joined: 31/01/10
yeah , carnt argue with that
!!
Reverse cycle a/c supply and install - Ducted and wall splits
RAGBAG
Posts: 315
Date Joined: 30/05/08
Against
There are millions of sharks being killed every year as it for there fins etc . And how has that helped the situation - only made matters worse by taking away a food source of the bigger sharks . Big sharks eat smaller sharks .... Keep taking the food source away and there will be more attacks on humans .
chris raff
Posts: 3257
Date Joined: 09/02/10
For
Eradication isn't the intent ...
“Intelligence is like a four-wheel drive. It only allows you to get stuck in more remote places.”
spinksy
Posts: 266
Date Joined: 06/10/10
For
This tagging thing is smoke and mirrors they dont want people to know how many of these things are cruising the coast but have probably released this info to the state government hence the cull. If big sharks hang around time to go... Why the debate just another fish people fish and kill a few as bycatch and dont think twice about it but cry about killing these dangerous animals.. And i would start with the one in the sound it has an association with boats and food now so it presents a danger. For public saftey we have to do something.
Faulkner Family
Posts: 18062
Date Joined: 11/03/08
no not just for the sake of
no not just for the sake of killing a shark that may be in a dangerous position for us.
RUSS and SANDY. A family that fishes together stays together
Dizzy
Posts: 753
Date Joined: 21/02/11
I'm strongly against it too -
I'm strongly against it too - they need to implement a good tracking program to try and work out whether it's the same sharks. i.e. rogues.
Funding ? how can they argue against it when they blatantly squander millions on far less worthy causes.
Culling every shark just because it's in a certain area is a joke and could lead to a pile of unnecessary kills.
What about all of the sharks in Cockburn Sound at the moment - are they going to kill all of them ?
Yes, WA has a shark problem.
Yes I have kids who I'd like to be safe in the water.
But this problem was created through human stupidity & mismanagement....... the cull option is just a piss-weak knee-jerk solution, and the sharks deserve far more time and respect.
If they can identify the right shark after a close-to-shore attack, then yes - I'd probably support it.
But a cull based on more bad theories & decisions of pig-thick pollies is a joke.
Paul H
Posts: 2104
Date Joined: 18/01/07
An interesting subject -
An interesting subject - personally I'm against unless the shark is identified as a definate and immediate threat or is definately one that has recently attacked a person/s. How a body such as fisheries could identify this would not be easy save for cutting the shark open and finding remains. Having someone actually being in a position to kill a shark about to kill someone is unlikely to occur.
Interestingly a majority of families of victims tend to say to leave the shark alone and indicate that's what the victim would have wanted as they were doing what they loved to do and knew the risk...etc
We have a couple of regulars off the adelaide metro coast - some reasonably close to shore and although we have had the odd attack over the years certainly nothing like the frequency around sth wst WA at the moment.
5 attacks in last 10 months - yep seems to be something up over there.
How you'd identify the one (if its one) doing the damage. The only way I can think of this happening is if the right one was tagged and another attack occurred - not ideal but could stop further attacks after that if it could be identified and located/killed.
my 2 cents
Cheers
Paul
Youtube Channel - FishOnLine Productions
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbUVNa-ViyGm_FTDSv4Nqzg/videos
opsrey
Posts: 1200
Date Joined: 05/10/07
For
Need to target the ones coming in close. It won't be many, but if we get them dead then the situation can be looked a twit the view that it can't be the one that was there last year. I feel that the authorities are scared to reveal the true numbers of GW sharks coming in close.
meglodon
Posts: 5981
Date Joined: 17/06/10
No No No don't cull
a lot more needs to be know about these creatures before we go out bombing straffing shooting netting and whatever else the human mind can condger up to destroy another animal that shares this planet with us.
the first thing that should be looked at is what has changed in such a short period of time that has seen a dramatic rise in shark sightings and attacks when you know what has changed if in fact it has been a change look at mitigating the change we humans can change our bathing habits and have done so over eions of time to suit the changing enviroment. Mr gw hasn't changed as nature has not forced him to do so so for eions of time all he does is swim foricate and eat.
I don't believe we should bring about a reduction in numbers of gws unless science can quite clearly show that numbers have increased to such a level that there can be a cull without stuffing up the balance of nature.
Look back at the cane toad stuff up someone said if we don't look back at history we are in grave danger of repeating it
rant over
black gen
Posts: 762
Date Joined: 13/04/11
forwould make for a good set
for
would make for a good set of jaws on the wall!
madfisher
Posts: 206
Date Joined: 10/10/07
So are they going to do
So are they going to do something about the Sharks praying on people in Northbridge too? to be honest I feel safer in the ocean than I do there
Dizzy
Posts: 753
Date Joined: 21/02/11
................. aaaand Jill
...... aaaand Jill Meagher's Rapist / Murderer is sitting in a comfy cell awaiting his fair trial.
...... probably to be jailed for life in a cosy institution, costing taxpayers millions that could be put towards proper research.
Priorities are completely f#cked up.
I know where I'd be putting MY bullet.
scotto
Posts: 2471
Date Joined: 21/04/08
i couldnt agree more
.
Snags
Posts: 558
Date Joined: 07/05/09
I was just about to post the
I was just about to post the same thing...
if they dont "cull" this guy, then leave the sharks alone!
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-27/man-charged-with-rape-murder-of-jill-meagher/4284826
madfisher
Posts: 206
Date Joined: 10/10/07
Totally agree Dizzy
Totally agree Dizzy
crasny1
Posts: 7003
Date Joined: 16/10/08
For
But only if identified as one that stalks the shallows, ir Rogue shark theory. No to Coburn sound, deeper.
"I would like to die on Mars. Just not on impact!!" _ Elon Musk
Handi 1
Posts: 151
Date Joined: 27/06/11
Completely agree with that
Completely agree with that one , shoot the prick and any other sicko that touches children or women for that purpose . Then all the money we save from feeding , housing , etc this scum , can go to a better cause . Leave the sharks be , its a choice we make to enter their world
Dhui on river to sea jig a few years back , 16 kg ! PB for me .
Willlo
Posts: 1490
Date Joined: 07/10/11
FOR
FOR
Call Sign - BZ785
Haynes Hunter Prowler CC
Deckie
Posts: 1296
Date Joined: 03/04/09
Against
Unless there is a positive identification of the "killer shark" in question. To some people, a shark is a shark kill em all. Look what almost happened to the Grey Nurse shark on the east coast years ago. I think there is a reason we are getting more big ocean going sharks closer to shore now, perhaps more money should be put to that study & rectifying the problem than paying a bounty on jaws.
My thoughts only & i welcome others.
cheers & stay safe Rob
Cheers & Stay safe
TAPOUT
Posts: 885
Date Joined: 27/01/06
I'm all for a cull. I'm sure
I'm all for a cull. I'm sure you would all think differently if it took one of you kids. As for the families of the victims saying that the victim wouldn't want the shark killed I bet while they were being attacked they would be wanting the f#%king thing dead. There are thousands all over the world for them to study killing a few isn't going to put a dent in the population overall.
Ric
Posts: 83
Date Joined: 21/11/10
Tricky, would say
Tricky, would say against
Exactly like Seb says, if it's to dangerous don't do it !!!
However if one of my kids/wife or family was in direct danger, I dont know what I would say ????
rocket73
Posts: 37
Date Joined: 07/09/11
For
In a measured manner. And the idea of controlling it (as per other threads) and making money to fund scientific programs and research properly is a win win in my books. There are a lot of them in our waters....thin em out (a bit)
Buz
Posts: 1555
Date Joined: 28/08/07
For those epeople saying that
For those people saying that there are plenty of them or there are alot of them, how many do you actually think there are???
And for the people who say there are thousands of them, why do you think there 'are thousands of them all over the world to study'?
Would you really think that "killing a few isn't going to put a dent in the population overall" will actually make a difference to shark fatalities here in WA? I guess it might if it could be proven that the sharks doing the killing are 'local sharks' and not ones that range far across the ocean so hence thinning out the 'local' sharks. Again why there is more research need to determine what sharks are 'locals' and what sharks are transient to our water.
I mean if all the worlds leading shark researchers, scientists, and any other shark experts cant determine the world populations other than rough estimates(which range greatly from numbers as low as 800 right to as 'high' as 5000) how can little old fishing enthusiased here in Perth go, "nah mate plenty of them, kill them, cull them, shoot them etc.
I mean even if they are at the higher end of the estimates being 5000 across the globe, this still puts there numbers scaringly low. Seems one of the widely accepted estimates(amongst Marine boffins) put there numbers around 3500, which would mean they are on par with Tigers in the wild, and even far less than how many Black and or White Rhinos in the wild.
But like i said earlier i personally am not against the destruction of a shark that has been positively identified as a known killer. Its just i can get my head around the people that have the blow them out of the water attitude, or that there are heaps of them and killing a few wont affect the population!
marrisy
Posts: 205
Date Joined: 08/09/11
for a cull,personal reasons.
for a cull,personal reasons.
RedNeck
Posts: 29
Date Joined: 05/05/12
Against
We dont even kill humans that murder, rape and all those other shit things. So why should we kill some animal thats whole job in life is to kill and eat i'm sorry but this whole subject pisses me off greatly. Tag them track them
Signed
Pissed off and angry Redneck
P.S - What dizzy said
Master......Baiter....
TAPOUT
Posts: 885
Date Joined: 27/01/06
It's not a human it's a fish
It's not a human it's a fish there is a big difference. We kill cows,chickens and anythink else that takes our fancy what's the difference. The ocean is 90% unexplored so don't tell me that we will affect the numbers by culling a few.
MattMiller
Posts: 4171
Date Joined: 15/06/09
Umm...
We kill cows,chickens and anythink else that takes our fancy for food. That is the difference.
FYI against.
Dizzy
Posts: 753
Date Joined: 21/02/11
No-one's really saying it'll
No-one's really saying it'll affect numbers, I think the main argument is the principle behind the cull.
If the ocean is 90% unexplored that means you know f#ck all about it - just like everyone else - so don't tell me it won't.
We don't know how it'll affect things by culling, but we DO know it won't affect things if there is no cull.
So how about we make decisions based on facts and research rather than unfounded gut feelings, fear and economics ?
People have brought this shit upon themselves with the exact same "it's not a human, it's a fish" mentality
- it's about time we started taking responsibility and copping the consequences on the chin.
If that means changing a few things and paying more respect to the ocean and its inhabitants then so be it.
fishy fingers
Posts: 1719
Date Joined: 28/04/07
for food
We kill cows,chickens and anythink else the difference is these animals are bred to feed humans nothing else.
TAPOUT
Posts: 885
Date Joined: 27/01/06
There has been more and more
There has been more and more shark attacks in the last few years so I think that proves that things are changing. So how can you say that a cull won't change anything. My belief is that things will get worse and proof is in the death toll over the last 12 months. There's a fact for you. Maybe these animals were bred for food this is true but the point I was trying make was it is far from being the same as a human. Bad example on my part.
fishy fingers
Posts: 1719
Date Joined: 28/04/07
I agree with you in a way
I dive......well I havent much for the last couple of years.... I want to get back into it this summer but to be honest
I'm very concerend about the sharks whereas I never used to give them a second thought, I'm not in favour of a cull
on the other hand I dont want to see anybody else eaten I just know something needs to be done but I dont have the answer, I suppose I'll be staying on the boat until things quieten down and I have a shark shield.... but I still dont have the confidence yet to get in the water
RedNeck
Posts: 29
Date Joined: 05/05/12
Still cranky
Do the same as what we do to murders put them in a shark jail for 10 years and retrain them as that works really well(for human Rapist and murders so we've seen lately). we dont kill cars, they kill people as does every thing else on the planet a bloke gets killed by a golf ball do we kill the ball or the golfer. or is it just a simple case of more people in the water ? water sports werent as big as they are now surfing, diving as gone nuts in the last ten years
My rant is done
Master......Baiter....
mulloway_hunter
Posts: 455
Date Joined: 18/04/11
defs against eh. just cause
defs against eh. just cause there are whites comin in closer. the sharks have been following the whale migration this year and we "happen to get some whales in close to cott. then a white stated appearing all up and down the coast following and trying to find them. and when that guy got taken at wedge couple of the locals were saying that a whale had just left the wedge a day ago. all these sharks are just trying to follow there food source and then by mistake eat a human because they were in the wronge place at the wrong time
the same thing with the whites at cockburn atm with all the snapper hanging around the whites are cruising round trying to find easy food. this has been happening for the last how many years now.
Jimmyb
Posts: 21
Date Joined: 22/03/12
for
if a dog/dingo attacks a human...it gets the injection. if a shark attacks a human...its protected. where on a fishing forum..we all take fish out of the ocean. GW in my opinion are no different.
snappermiles
Posts: 2100
Date Joined: 05/11/10
for
but the carcasses should be used for research! and i only say for because the government wont spend the money to do a proper tagging program! and they wont release accurate data of how many sharks the scientist think are out there
ALL FISHERMEN ARE LIARS EXCEPT YOU AND ME! AND IM NOT SO SURE ABOUT YOU!
Lastchance
Posts: 1273
Date Joined: 02/02/09
Heres what I reckon
Make them an eligible species again on the GFAA species list, fuck the IGFA as this would take too long, and let members catch them for club/competition points like the old days. If they are so smart, they will soon associate boats with indigestion, pain and accupuncture. If we cull now and close, we will have to cull again and again, probably with a few surfers and divers' deaths in between.
IF my hypothetical situation comes true, and IF you are lucky enough to tag or catch one, just be prepared for the international backlash that you will definately get......should see that banter when one of the boys swings a legal shark and some fin hugging hippy gets a photo of it - less exposure netting dolphins!